5x7shooter
Member
Sironar N, Sironar N MC, Apo Sironar N?
Sironar-N MC in late model black Copal shutter
Sironar N, Sironar N MC, Apo Sironar N?
I agree with Drew about post-WWII Dagors. The 7" US-made Dagor, factory coated, is one of the best lenses that I've used - fully equivalent to my multicoated Sironar-N of the same focal length.
Both of my post-WWII Kodak 8"/7.7 factory-coated Kodak Ektars are also very good and are Dialyte designs similar to the later Fujinon C. Multicoating would have been nice on the Dialyte-design Ektars, but doesn't seem necessary for the later Dagors. T
The Cooke is, as I recall, 8 elements in four groups, two groups in each cell, with an air-space. In the broadest sense, one could consider the Cooke to be vaguely akin to the Dialyte but with each Dialyte element consisting instead of a cemented pair. Alternatively, you could consider the Cooke to be a Plasmat with the single rear element of each cell split into a cemented pair.
Ian - my late model reverse-Dagor design 120mm Angulon is decent but the multicoated 125mm/5.6 Fujinon NWS fully air-spaced Plasmat is markedly superior.
My first Dagor was actually the last to be made (with one rare exception) - the multicoated Kern 14 inch. It had the highest contrast, best microtonality, and purest hue rendition of any lens I've ever had, in any format. It was quite sharp, but not as sharp as my equivalent focal length Fuji 360A "Super Plasmat".
Wow did this thread go off topic. Anyway the only old lens I have for large format is the Ektar 127mm for 4x5. But I can't use this lens on anything bigger. Most of my lenses are Fujinons.
Sironar-N MC in late model black Copal shutter
They told me the reason for discontinuing them was that they were difficult to make and require very fussy matching of elements
Schneider owned the marketing to the last of the dagors made by Kern in Switzerland.
They told me the reason for discontinuing them was that they were difficult to make and require very fussy matching of elements, and that their G-Claron plasmat line was better corrected for most purposes..
They told me the reason for discontinuing them was that they were difficult to make and require very fussy matching of elements, and that their G-Claron plasmat line was better corrected for most purposes.
I don't personally know if the dagors were ever offered in shutter by the factory itself. My literature doesn't go back that far. But Schneider did offer one focal length of their Componon enlarging lens in shutter for tabletop studio use prior to the G-Claron plasmats taking over that role.
Well my 300mm f5.6 Fujinon lens came yesterday.
(Oh, I see you have the "L" lens. I have never owned that one, but I'm sure others can chime in with their experience with that lens.)
My 90mm Georz American Optical WA Dagor does not appear to be coated but still seems optically as good or somewhat better than the late model coated 90mm Angulon.and seems to cover more.
Overall, with the exception of the 7" US-made Dagor, the newer multi-coated Plasmat design lenses seem to produce generally better measurable results than older Dagor and Protar VIIa fully cemented lenses that I compared.
I even managed to aquire some 8x10 Velvia 50 for not a bad price.
With the Kern dagors, any alleged abberation issues or focus shift disappears less than a stop down, even before f/11. As per Fuji L's, they're sharp thick-element tessars, but with gentler edge rendition and background blur than most plasmats, so generally better suited for portraiture, but with less image circle for general applications. The only thin element LF tessars I can think of are Nikkor M's, although the previous single-coated Q series might be similar; I dunno.
My 305 G-Claron comes in a Copal 1 shutter. I found Schneider and Grimes data that I squirreled away as PDF files that state that the 210-305 G-Clarons are all direct #1 shutter drop-ins. The 150mm GC was a #0 shutter and the 355 a #3.
One of my G-Clarons, a 240mm, is definitely an early Dagor-style GC and optically not quite up to the Plasmat-style 210 and 305 GCs nor Fujinon W Plasmats..
My only Compur 2 shuttered lens is a Voightlander 115/5.5 Ultragron UWA. That #2 Compur is a dialset, the Ultragon is about mid-1950s. A competent lens but I think that my later model 120mm reverse-Dagor Angulon may be a bit better on 5x7. Both are factory single-coated and rated to cover 5x7, but the Ultragon corners are mushy on 5x7. Neither has any visible nicks or damage and both are factory shutter mounts.
That combination is harder to achieve today, now that certain classic graded papers are gone, because "snatch" development was involved, and required a very high silver content.
The L version Im told is the more desirable lens, as it produces better bokeh, has a slightly softer look without losing much sharpness, and overall looks better in the picture. Its compared to having a look of older lenses. The W lens could be said to be too clinically sharp, losing the life the L version had. And in 8x10, it doesn't need to be so sharp as to cut something with it. The L seems to have a creamier look. But I have yet to use my 8x10 setup, as I am still getting stuff for it that is on my list. I believe I have the lenses I need now, though to be safe, Im switching my 210mm lens to the older version for more coverage. I still need to get a larger dark bag, an 8x10 flatbed scanner, a dark hood for shooting, and possibly a couple other items including negative sleeves from Printfile. I have enough film for now. I even managed to aquire some 8x10 Velvia 50 for not a bad price.
I How tight do you find the 120mm Angulon's coverage on 5x7? I bought mine for 4x5 use mainly, but keep wondering about acquiring a 5x7. .
My 120 Angulon covers 5x7 OK but without any significant movement. Schneider rates sharp coverage as about 83 or so degrees and that seems about right in my experience. The 120 Angulon's edges are OK at f/22 on 5x7 and even reasonably good on-axis but the corners may be somewhat soft. I got mine for a very light outdoor 5x7 outfit and I think that it does well in that role. As you already have one, it's worth running your own 5x7 test. The extreme corners are not as sharp as the 120mm/8 Fujinon SW (inside writing) that has loads of spare coverage but that's a much bigger and heavier lens.
How tight do you find the 120mm Angulon's coverage on 5x7? I bought mine for 4x5 use mainly, but keep wondering about acquiring a 5x7.
Photrio.com contains affiliate links to products. We may receive a commission for purchases made through these links. To read our full affiliate disclosure statement please click Here. |
PHOTRIO PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY: ![]() |